How far have we come? benchmarking time and costs for monograph purchasing

The University of Oregon Library System conducted a benchmark study during autumn 1997 to determine time and costs for monograph purchasing, cataloging, and processing. The goals of the study were first to assess if it would be cost effective to contract out some or all of the cataloging and final processing for some monographs, and secondly, to provide data that could be used as a management tool and shared with other libraries. The acquisition and QuickCat costs per unit for various types of purchases were calculated showing that cost alone would not be a sufficient reason to outsource or purchase shelf-ready books. However, opportunity costs should also be considered. Additionally, the data are compared with a task analysis study conducted in 1982/83, just prior to automating.     

Shelf-ready books using PromptCat and YBP: Issues to consider (An analysis of errors at the University of Arkansas)

In 2005/2006, the authors evaluated cataloging and physical processing supplied through the University of Arkansas Libraries' shelf-ready contract with YBP Library Services and PromptCat. The authors examined 298 titles from three samples, with emphasis placed on series headings. Results showed that while 99.33% of titles received records and 99.66% of records received correctly matched their corresponding books, 27.05% of records exhibited errors affecting catalog access, and records for 38.59% of titles needed modification. Moreover, 32.11% of series headings required further attention to comply with local authority procedures. This study should prove useful to other libraries contemplating a shelf-ready contract and the level of quality control they wish to exercise.     

The Books Are Shelf-Ready; Are You?

Over the past 2 years, shelf-ready services, the outsourcing of cataloging and processing services, has become the hot topic in the library world. This article examines the implications of shelf-ready service, both operationally and organizationally, for both library and vendor. Using the format of a dialog between librarian and vendor, the article discusses the following questions: Why are you interested in contracting for (or providing) these services? What do you hope to gain? What are the stumbling blocks to implementing a shelf-ready program? What is the impact on workflow and staffing in your organization? How many and what kinds of jobs are affected? How do library/vendor responsibilities change when shelf-ready procedures are applied to an approval plan … to firm orders … to standing orders? How can quality control be assured? Which errors really matter? Are the same standards applied to vendor staff as to in-house staff? How are standards affected by shelf-ready? How do both library and vendor know when they’re “ready for shelf-ready” in a given situation?     

Which worked better for Mississippi State: standing orders or an approval plan?

When Mississippi State University Libraries established a university press approval plan, the Collection Development Department was asked to decide whether to cancel existing standing orders with seven university presses or block these presses from the approval plan. Books were received through both avenues for eight months so that cost, timeliness of delivery, and receipt of titles most appropriate for the Libraries’ needs could be compared. Findings showed a 4.72% cost savings with the approval plan, but 82% of the titles were received earlier through the standing orders. Of books received through the standing orders, 29% were not received through the approval plan, with more than half not matching departmental profiles. Return privileges with the approval plan meant unsuitable titles could be returned, a significant advantage not possible with the standing orders. As a result of the study, the libraries chose to cancel the standing orders and receive books selectively through a university press approval plan.     

Collection Assessment of Monograph Purchases at the University of Nevada,Las Vegas Libraries

The purpose of this article is to describe an assessment project of the monograph collection at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) Lied Library. The circulation statistics and in-house use of all monographs for the nine colleges at UNLV were assessed analyzing the last five years of data. The analysis included an assessment of the circulation statistics and in-house use of books purchased on an approval plan compared with books purchased by individual liaison librarians. The findings illustrated the fact that overall use of the monograph collection has declined over the past five years. The findings also showed that books purchased on an approval plan had slightly higher use than the books purchased by individual liaisons. The study shows that academic libraries need to monitor usage of the monograph collection to be certain that money is spent in the most efficient manner and that usage data can be helpful if there is a need to reduce budget allocations for monographs or if a reallocation of funds for monographs is necessary.     

Which worked better for Mississippi State: standing orders or an approval plan?

When Mississippi State University Libraries established a university press approval plan, the Collection Development Department was asked to decide whether to cancel existing standing orders with seven university presses or block these presses from the approval plan. Books were received through both avenues for eight months so that cost, timeliness of delivery, and receipt of titles most appropriate for the Libraries’ needs could be compared. Findings showed a 4.72% cost savings with the approval plan, but 82% of the titles were received earlier through the standing orders. Of books received through the standing orders, 29% were not received through the approval plan, with more than half not matching departmental profiles. Return privileges with the approval plan meant unsuitable titles could be returned, a significant advantage not possible with the standing orders. As a result of the study, the libraries chose to cancel the standing orders and receive books selectively through a university press approval plan.     

E-Preferred Approval Plan at a Large Academic Library: Assessment and Collection Development Implications

Academic libraries acquiring e-books through approval plans and other acquisition methods might question whether their collections are properly balanced between e-books and print books since patron needs vary across subject areas. This study examines seven years of monograph purchases at Texas A&M University Libraries (TAMU) through the approval plan vendor. Acquisition and use data are analyzed across subject areas. Study results inform how to balance print and e-collections to effectively support academic programs. TAMU purchased 78% of the monographs in print despite adopting an e-preferred approval plan, though most subject areas had higher e-book use compared to print.     

Collection development and outsourcing in academic health sciences libraries: a survey of current practices

Academic health sciences libraries in the United States and Canada were surveyed regarding collection development trends, including their effect on approval plan and blanket order use, and use of outsourcing over the past four years. Results of the survey indicate that serials market forces, budgetary constraints, and growth in electronic resources purchasing have resulted in a decline in the acquisition of print items. As a result, approval plan use is being curtailed in many academic health sciences libraries. Although use of blanket orders is more stable, fewer than one-third of academic health sciences libraries report using them currently. The decline of print collections suggests that libraries should explore cooperative collection development of print materials to ensure access and preservation. The decline of approval plan use and the need for cooperative collection development may require additional effort for sound collection development. Libraries were also surveyed about their use of outsourcing. Some libraries reported outsourcing cataloging and shelf preparation of books, but none reported using outsourcing for resource selection. The reason given most often for outsourcing was that it resulted in cost savings. As expected, economic factors are driving both collection development and outsourcing practices.     

Making the Common Uncommon?

Abstract

Many libraries have entered into cooperative or consor-tial agreements to reap the cost benefits of electronic purchases, to share a library system vendor, or to divide collection-building responsibilities. However, among such cooperating libraries the formal coordination of approval plan profiles has seldom been attempted. Many questions need to be answered before a group of libraries could enter into a cooperative approval plan. Would the political and administrative costs of designing and maintaining a cooperative profile be sufficiently offset by a broadened overall collection among cooperating libraries? To what degree do libraries acting independently achieve the same approval plan results that a formal coordination of profiles would generate?

The Triangle Research Libraries Network (Duke University, North Carolina Central University, North Carolina State University, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) is comprised of four geographically-close institutions that have been building cooperative collections for more than 50 years. Some of their agreements have been quite formal and others have been quite informal.

This study looks at the degree of approval plan overlap among TRLN libraries; at circulation data for these overlapping titles; and at lists of titles not acquired within the consortium. The results may inform the question of whether separate, uncoordinated approval plans already meet the need of the TRLN consortium, or if consortial approval plan cooperation might benefit the group.

An examination of monographs in four selected Library of Congress classes supplied to the TRLN libraries by Yankee Book Peddler over a six month period in 1997 provided data to examine issues surrounding a consortial approval plan. The degree of overlap among the four institutions was defined, and circulation statistics showed whether books acquired by multiple libraries had a high level of use. A list of YBP titles not acquired by any of the libraries during the same timeperiod wasalso analyzed, to examine whether formal cooperation might have usefully broadenedtheoverallcollection.     

Analysis of Print Purchase on Demand Titles Ordered via Interlibrary Loan: A Collection Development Perspective

This article examines data from five years of titles ordered as part of an academic research library's purchase on demand program (POD-ILL) for print titles originally requested through interlibrary loan. The study evaluates a variety of factors: patron departments, campus location, and status; the subject areas of the books acquired; cost; and publishers. Assessment of POD-ILL data may assist a collection management librarian to determine the value of having patrons contribute to collection development decisions. In addition, subject librarians can use the data to evaluate approval and demand-driven acquisition profiles.     

How biomedical investigators use library books

Relatively few studies have been concerned with the use of biomedical books. This paper reports an investigation into use made of library books by biomedical investigators. Based on cancelled charge slips collected at the Yale Medical Library circulation desk, telephone appointments were made to interview those research investigators whose books had been returned the previous day. The interviewer obtained answers from the investigator to a questionnaire to discover how the investigator had learned of a book, if the book had been useful, and, if useful, how it had been used. During the six-month study period, 30.4 percent of researchers' volumes returned were monographs. Almost four-fifths of books borrowed supplied information wanted, and about four-fifths of books used had been printed in the previous decade. Nine-tenths of the use of books was research-related, the other tenth being for lecture preparation.     

Approval plans,discipline change,and the importance of human mediated book selection

This study examines holdings of 21 members of the Association of Research Libraries for books reviewed in American Historical Review. The study asserts that approval plans are inadequate for collecting from small publishers or from scholarship that crosses disciplinary boundaries. Although approval plans increase efficiency in collection development, the need for expert selection cannot be overstated. Results indicated that small publisher's books were less likely to be in libraries than university press publisher's books, and that history monographs are frequently classified outside disciplinary boundaries, and are therefore invisible to approval plans that define disciplines based on classification systems.     

The potential for scholarly online books: Views from the Columbia University Online Books Evaluation Project

The Columbia University Online Books Evaluation Project sought to understand both user reactions to online books in the scholarly world and the cost profiles of print and online books. Scholars appreciated the opportunity to use the online format to locate a book and to browse it. However, they sought a print copy for extended reading. Incremental costs of online books are small for publishers. Libraries’ life-cycle costs are lower for online books than for print books. Summerfield and Mandel were both members of the Columbia University Libraries staff during the time of this project. Summerfield was a Project Director and Coordinator of this Project and Mandel was Deputy University Librarian and Director of this Project.     

Review of "The Living Library: An Intellectual Ecosystem," by Patricia Steele,David Cronrath,Sandra Parsons Vicchio,and Nancy Fried Foster

This study was conducted in order to establish an objective basis for managerial decisions relating to the preservation of library books. The investigation was concerned with the operational issues underlying such decisions, focusing specifically upon the problem of accurately and efficiently assessing books in terms of their present physical condition and past utility. Its objectives were: (a) to determine if date of publication and/or measures of library use (i.e., frequency of circulation and date of last circulation) constitute reliable indices of a book's current physical condition; (b) to determine if the frequency with which a book has been circulated tends to correspond with its date of last circulation; and (c) to devise a systematic approach to the preservation of library books based upon the results of the inquiries (a) and (b).     

Catalogers Unite! Creating Documentation through Collaboration

Recent changes have forced Bowling Green State University (BGSU) to reevaluate our documentation, workflows, and communication. There have been staff retirements, changes in staff responsibilities, and a new faculty cataloger. Additionally, BGSU is implementing a discovery layer, purchasing shelf-ready books, and adding more electronic resources. It has become apparent that documentation needs to be updated and, in many cases, created from scratch. Collaboration is critical as catalogers are currently few in number and are seeing the need to work with other departments in ways unheard of previously. The creation of a new cataloging manual is vital to the success of cataloging at BGSU.     

The pregnant pause: The time between profiling an approval plan and receiving books

In the selection of a new approval plan vendor, most of the library's attention is on pricing, selection procedures, publisher coverage, and profiling. In most cases, less thought is given to what events will actually take place between the time profiles are completed and books are shipped to the library. Decisions surrounding this time period can make the difference between a successful and problematic approval plan implementation. This article, developed by a bookseller, explores these issues and the options libraries have in the implementation phase of approval plans.     

面向先秦典籍的知识本体构建技术研究

[目的/意义] 构建面向典籍文本的语义本体，能够促进典籍文本的挖掘与分析。然而由于典籍文本与现代文本在语法上存在较大差异，给面向典籍的语义本体构建带来了困难。[方法/过程] 本文运用自然语言处理技术探讨针对先秦典籍的本体构建方法。以国际上文化遗产领域通用的CIDOC CRM为框架，设计先秦典籍本体模型。针对典籍文本内容的特点及句法特征，将规则抽取与条件随机场方法相结合，提出一套本体实例自动获取技术，并以《左传》为实验语料进行测试。[结果/结论] 实验表明，本文所提出的本体实例抽取技术能够较好地提高面向典籍文本的本体构建效率。基于规则的本体实例抽取实验F值在93%左右，基于条件随机场的本体实例抽取最佳特征模板的F值为82.51%。在本体实例获取中，词性信息和位置信息具有重要作用。     

古籍文献借阅的保护对策研究

古籍文献具有很高的文献价值和版本价值，使用与保护就构成了古籍文献借阅工作中的一对矛盾。如何解决古籍文献借阅工作中的藏用矛盾，最大限度保护和开发利用古籍文献，成为图书馆古籍借阅部门的一个重要课题。长期的实践总结出了十个方面的经验做法，对解决这一问题具有一定的参考和指导意义。